|
| |
 |
fool4JESUS
(PoetPatriot) - Faith BLOG
ARCHIVES
of Roger W Hancock - AKA - the
fool4JESUS & the PoetPatriot.
2003 - 2004 -
2005 -
2006 -
2007 - 2010 |
 |
|
|
|
|
~~~~ ><>
~~~~ ~~~~
2010
~~~~ ~~~~
<>< ~~~~
|
Christ Child's Season
December 11, 2010
Merry Christmas America! The nation that took the greatest birth,
celebrated it and then birthed the many secular traditions that embraced
the joy, forgiveness and peace of God’s Lamb, His only Son; born, lived,
died, resurrected. God’s sacrifice on our behalf, for our sin, that we
might live forever with Him in Heaven; that we not die to eternally live
a tormented never ending death. All need we do is repent of all sins,
known and unknown and to embrace the Lamb, the Christ of Christmas. May
the masses embrace the King, if only in the Christ Child’s Season.
- Roger W Hancock,
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~.><>.~~~~ |
|
~~~~ ><>
~~~~ ~~~~
2007
~~~~ ~~~~
<>< ~~~~
|
Depression ?
September 21, 2007
Even Christians can fall into “depression,” Though there is
no need for it. The Christian has the power of God, of His Holy Spirit
to overcome. Better yet, if we do not give in to the temptation of
self-pity we can more easily overcome the sin. Self-pity is the
precursor to depression. For the Christian, depression is the
failure to maintain God’s joy.
Depression is the quelling of joy that should permeate
our being. By succumbing to the temptations to think upon our troubles
we give presence to self pity. Self pity is the beginning of depression.
"Woe is me, woe is me." Depression is the pit with self pity and lack of
joy being the demons that will drag you into the abyss of depression.
Self-pity and depression are sins. We sin by dwelling
upon our troubles. Worrying about that which we have no control, will
accomplish nothing. We sin by worrying and not trusting God. We sin when
we do not avail ourselves of the joy God has so graciously given.
Self-pity is selfishness. We must first resist the temptation of
self-pity which pulls into depression. Once we have sinned we must go
before God for forgiveness and the power to overcome.
Overcoming depression or any sin is not necessarily the
eradication of it. Overcoming is the availing of God’s grace to
overcome the temptation to dwell on that which troubles you. Sin is the
testing of our spirits the resisting of sin strengthens our relationship
with Jesus Christ. We must dwell in the Joy God gives and cling to Jesus
resisting temptation.
As Christians we must resist all temptations and learn
to recognize those that our brothers and sisters may be struggling with.
I remember when I succumbed to depression. I had thoughts that
were uncharacteristic and surprised me when they arose. I found
myself calmly calculating a jump from a window. It was the
thought, not the jump that scared me. I mentioned to a couple of
brothers the unusual thoughts, and thinking back it was plea for help.
The comments went by without notice. Eventually I entered counseling
with my pastor. I no longer have such thoughts as I resist the
precursors, the temptations to meditate on the troubles. I
meditate on God's word and am elevated when on His joy I place my
sorrows.
Christ suffered the temptation of self-pity yet did not
succumb. Jesus had the power as God to overcome and avails to us that
same power when on Him we trust.
- Roger W Hancock,
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~.><>.~~~~ |
What
Is Life?
March 1, 2007
What is life? That
is the beginning of unanswered questions. Man knows what will sustain
life. Man knows how life procreates. Man cannot answer the question,
“What makes life?” Man has explored the minute matter of life in
attempts to find the origin of life. Though much information is
discovered, learning what is necessary for life to exist, more questions
arise. As man studies the smallest, “simplest” components of life he
finds much more complexity exponentially expanding the unknown.
Within that vast unknown of the minute building blocks of life are
complex design programs that specify species, sex, race, breed, size,
skin pigmentation, hair color and other genetic attributes and
frailties. The complexities of those programs have been compared to the
complexities within the many infrastructure systems of New York City.
The systems within a city may have been designed by man, however, the
principles they are based upon were not. The whole of New York City was
comprised of many various systems that were designed and built as a need
arose without much foresight of future needs. As a result we have New
York City as it is, not designed as a whole but evolving as man’s needs
and wants developed.
Within the complexities of DNA is a vast program that man cannot
duplicate. The DNA program is so complex the likeliness of it evolving
has the odds of infinite proportions. Without DNA, man, animals, foul,
and fish could not exist. Just consider the odds that two different
sexes would develop simultaneously to continue a species. Adding to that
consider the odds that the life would have lived procreating until the
event of two sexes. Sound pretty preposterous to me, yet that is what
the evolutionist scientists want us to swallow. No evidence exists to
support a happenstance existence yet the folly of the theories are taken
as truth by our teachers, and courts to the exclusion of the only viable
explanation; Intelligent Design.
Yes, faith would be a factor in the consideration of Intelligent
Design, just as it takes to believe in a happenstance beginning of life
or an evolutionary development that fails to account for the
impossibilities of life leaping from one stage to the next. The
believability of our children’s fairy-tales comes to mind when I
consider the fables, I am expected to believe, created by the
evolutionists. Some will say that my belief in an existence created by
God is also a fairy-tale; however God cannot be disproved, whereas
evolutionary theory often disproves itself.
As man’s discoveries show more and more design in life the increasing
evidence points to Intelligent Design. The denying of the evidence to
exclude God, as even a theory, lies in the corrupt nature of man. To
acknowledge the possibility of God is the beginning of knowing the
corruptness within ones self. Man’s nature, without God’s intervention,
is anti-god and from there comes man’s agenda.
Life, summed up, is man’s struggle within himself to reconcile with
God or to embrace his own eternal demise.
- Roger W Hancock,
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~.><>.~~~~ |
|
~~~~ ><>
~~~~ ~~~~ 2006
~~~~ ~~~~
<>< ~~~~
|
Da Vinci Code boycott?
May 8, 2006
Some have supported the Idea of a boycott of the movie “The Da Vinci
Code” while others say boycott even the theaters and movies by Tom Hanks
and Ron Howard.
Boycotts
rarely have an effect and when failing, prove to have the effect of only
making the perpetrators bolder. One example is Disney Corp. Writing
letters seem to have a greater impact. The recipients have a tangible
count of the opposition. An organized letter campaign is more immediate
and need no follow-up.
How does one counter the "Da Vinci Code" movie? Simply put it is called
"fiction" and as such cannot be believed. They will say it is based upon
truth. Respond with, "What in the movie is truth and what is not?" Much
of what Brown asserts as truth is refuted by historians and, of course,
theologians. A show is either to be "fiction" or "nonfiction." You can
supposedly believe it or not. If taken as fact, Brown makes many
factually erroneous statements within his book, but that is to be
expected in a book of fiction.
Just Three of the fallacies that come to my mind at this time are:
Jesus Was not married; there are no biblical or historical facts, only
fact less conjecture, to even allude that Jesus had been married.
The Secret organizations mentioned are in reality not secret or had not
existed for the full "time setting" of the book.
Michael Angelo's life was devoted to the church. His dying words did not
even allude to a "feminine divine" or a "code," for that matter.
A book of fiction, as such, is to be enjoyed, not studied. The Catholic
Church may have historical cover ups but a "da Vinci code" is not one of
them.
- Roger W Hancock,
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~.><>.~~~~ |
Religious Atheism
January 17, 2006
Atheism is a religion. Atheism is the belief there is no god.
Those who actively seek to remove Christianity from our schools,
government, and society are proselytizing their faith. They practice,
promote and push their godless values on everyone else while profusely
objecting to any exhibition of other faiths.
Agnostics simply do not know whether a god exists or not, again, those
who effectively join with the atheists in activism to remove religion
from public discourse also push their beliefs, or lack of, to evangelize
their philosophies.
Human beings are religious beings, like it or not. I choose to not
subscribe to the Atheists philosophical religion or the agnostics fence
sitting position. I am not offended by their beliefs, rather I pity
them. I am, however, offended by their hypocrisy in pushing their
religious beliefs to suppress the expression of a living God by our
founding fathers.
The anti-religion religious activists seek revisionism of American
history and traditions to promote their views and beliefs. America has
been a melting pot where people of differing ethnicities, nationalities,
and religions have lived relatively peacefully learning to live
together. Now we have the ‘anti-religious religions’ seeking to cause
dissention among the American people. They attempt to deny and
eradicate the traditions of Americans that have stood for over two
hundred years.
- Roger W Hancock
© January 17, 2006 Roger W Hancock
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~.><>.~~~~
Concerning the above:
Reply from the
WordWarriorette http://www.WW123456.com
January 19, 2006
Well said! Except they
deeply offend me because they offend my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!
It is good to be offended by what offends God. In fact, God says in
Holy Scripture that we are to HATE that which God HATES. -- Donna
My Reply back to the WordWarriorette
Donna,
January 19, 2006
Of course you are right, but in the public discourse we tolerate
others. To be 'offended' by offenses to our Lord is on a far different
plane then the everyday interactions with others. Grant it I could
probably have phrased it differently. I will sometimes mild out the
language for a greater audience. I find when I write a piece that I
send to you only I am less likely to hold the punches.
Though we are offended we are to love them, however difficult that may
be. When we are in Him and He is in we, much greater is His love to love
others. Peter was offended but Jesus healed the servant's ear. God
loves even those who do what God hates.
Jesus give us one right; the right to accept Him or reject Him. Though
He loves all with an offense less justice He will accept or reject on
that final day of judgment.
~~~~.><>.~~~~ |
The Court's
Ignorance of Science and Law.
January 09, 2006
In banning Intelligent Design the
courts show their ignorance in law and science.
The U.S. Constitution is misquoted claiming "Separation of Church and
State." The 1987 Supreme Court ruling banning the balance between
creationism and evolution usurped the court's authority by evoking the
nonexistent phrase.
Science began with the premise that all was created by God and that man
had only to discover the principles God set in motion. Isaac Newton held
the premise of God's providential role in nature. Science is built upon
belief in God. Modern Science has built an agenda, attempting to dispel
God as a consideration. Science without God has more questions
requiring a far greater stretch of one's imagination.
Evolution as a theory is not a fact. If Intelligent Design cannot be
taught in our schools because it is not "scientific fact" then the
schools also cannot teach evolution, for evolution is not "scientific
fact." Were evolution a fact there would be no discussion.
Evolutionists hold to their religious beliefs of atheistic evolutionary
theory. The court has upheld one religious belief to suppress another.
- Roger W Hancock
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~.><>.~~~~
|
|
~~~~ ><>
~~~~ ~~~~
2005
~~~~ ~~~~
<>< ~~~~
|
Book of Daniel
December 29th, 2005
NBC had a series slated, called the "Book of Daniel" .
The main character is Daniel Webster, a drug-addicted Episcopal
priest. His wife is dependent on her mid-day martinis. Webster
is the only one who can see an unconventional white-robed, bearded
Jesus with whom he converses. The Republican son is a 23-year-old
homosexual, The daughter is a 16-year-old drug dealer, and the
16-year-old adopted son is sleeping with the bishop's daughter. At
the office, his sister-in-law is sleeping with his gay secretary.
Christians across the nation wrote to NBC and the affiliates to
protest the new series which NBC later chose to cancel.
Dear Sirs,
NBC's "The Book of Daniel" appears to be an irreverent attempt at
comedy taking the story-lines from day-time soap operas. The show
will go the way of all the other irreverent sitcoms, lasting only
one or two seasons, if that. Comedy based upon the demeaning of the
Christian faith has not done well in the past. The show will offend
many and bore others. I urge you to pre-empt the show to avoid
alienating much of your viewership sending them to other stations.
The residual effect will pull viewers from other shows lowering your
overall ratings.
NBC is doing your station no favors by producing the anti-Christian
bigotry. If the obnoxious content is not enough, then look to your
bottom line and do not air "The Book of Daniel."
I thank you for your time and consideration.
Roger W Hancock
~~~~ ><>
~~~~
|
Church and State?
December
22, 2005
The Sixth U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals strikes down the term "Separation of Church and
State" as tiresome. The court voted three to zero rejecting the ACLU's
claim that displaying the Ten Commandments violates the First Amendment.
Circuit Judge Surheinrich reviles the ACLU stating “repeated reference
‘to the separation of church and state’ . . . has grown tiresome." The
ACLU had brought suit against Mercer County, Kentucky for inclusion of
the Ten Commandments with, the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of
Independence, the Magna Charta, the Star Spangled Banner, the National
Motto, the Preamble to the Kentucky Constitution, the Bill of Rights to
the U. S. Constitution, and a picture of Lady Justice.
The First Amendment does not demand a wall of separation between church
and state.” The court recognized that a reasonable person would not
strip public places of symbols and text displaying American heritage and
traditions whether religious or otherwise. The court said the ACLU "...
does not embody the reasonable person"
Nowhere in our founding documents can the term "Separation of Church
and State" be found. It is about time our courts begin to address the
truth of our U.S. Constitution.
- © 2005 Roger W Hancock
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~
><> ~~~~
|
American Tradition
December 04, 2005
If we are going to condemn our politicians and businesses for
celebrating the American Tradition of Christmas and the American
tradition of embracing the Judeo/Christian ethics we must then condemn
each and every one of our founding fathers who set the traditions in
motion.
President Washington was not shy, expressing his faith in a manner
that pales all the statements by President Bush. Most if not all of the
Presidents through history have expressed and acknowledged the greater
God. President Clinton evoked God's name, although probably less than
any other.
To condemn religion now we must then condemn each signer for the
words included in the Declaration of Independence: "Nature's
God," "their Creator," "Supreme Judge of the world," "divine
Providence," and "sacred Honor." The founders addressed their faith
first in the Bill of Rights, as the first order of the First Amendment
of the U.S. Constitution that restricts government from regulating
religion. Every State of the union evokes the name of God in some
fashion, without exception. The first textbook authorized and
commissioned by the U.S. Congress for use in schools was the Holy
Bible.
“Separation of Church and State” is a myth, not to be found in any
U.S. founding document. To embrace the religious traditions of America
is to embrace the values and fortitude of America’s founding fathers.
~~~~ ><>
~~~~
|
Wrong but Right
July 8, 2005
Responding to a comment by the
WordWarriorette
concerning the targeting of the families of the terrorists.
|
Sub.; Right but Wrong - Donna; Wrong but Right
Often many people will speak off the top of their heads in the
heat of emotion. Fortunately fewer will act off the top of their
heads as do the perpetrators of passion crimes.
Whether from within passion or not, Donna speaks what she
feels. My inclination is to disagree with her, also; however, those who
decide the matters of war do so from a secular context. In a practical
matter Donna may well be right. When we consider the culture
of the terrorist lives and basis of beliefs we should consider a
retaliation that they would understand. The terrorists are not thugs of our own citizenry;
they are the enemy, in a war; an enemy which does not respect any
agreements of the Geneva Convention.
The families of suicide bombers are often financially rewarded by
supporters of terrorism. Do they not then, become our enemies having
profited from the killing of allied forces? Perhaps; perhaps not. The
terrorist respect only force, and nothing else, or possibly the safety
of their families. Take out the family of one terrorist and we might
get their attention. That again is a “maybe”. Although barbaric and
non-Christian, the extending of the war to family members of the enemy
may be the only “victory” the enemy would see as a “defeat.”
From a Christian Standpoint that would not be the way to handle it.
Those decisions are not made from a Christian standpoint.
Within a secular standpoint; though it may be a pragmatic strategy
that will not happen. The public opinion of our country and that of our
allies would condemn such actions. That is why this war will continue
as our punches are pulled allowing victories to the enemy.
The Christian has only two cheeks to turn. In the Middle East many cheeks have been turned to appease those
who prefer peace without consideration of the costs. At some point one
must stand against evil or suffer the consequences.
- Roger W Hancock,
www.PoetPatriot.com |
|
~~~~ ><>
~~~~ |
Clinton's Audacity
April 11, 2005
While on Air Force One, comparing his own legacy with the Pope's,
President Clinton states "He's like all of us -- he may have a mixed
legacy."
Not to take away from
Bill Clinton's arrogance, however he is right, except on the wrong
basis.
Bill Clinton is just
as good as the pope, or rather just as bad. “Sinton” has deluded
himself rather than confront his sins. Clinton is just as depraved as
anyone, no more, no less, at least in God's eyes. A sin is a sin… is
condemnation. I know we detest thinking of Clinton as equal with
ourselves, but except for the Grace of God... there go we.
Roger W Hancock,
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~ ><>
~~~~
|
Pope's
Legacy?
April 05, 2005
The pope is not God, an apostle or
a prophet. He has, however, shown the world a steadfastness in his
faith, even though many of us consider much of it misguided.
For many people the Pope is
just another world figure who passed on. However, comments on other
denominations have recently been used on the Catholic Church, “The
church is not in touch with Modern Times.”
In the basis of the tenets of
Christendom lies in that Christ is “the same, yesterday, today, and
forever.” A church may change to accommodate man but the tenets set by
God do not. This basis is in all Christian denominations. I suspect
there are similar assertions in most of the various religions.
Churches accommodating modern
man allow the sin of modern man. There are churches that do not teach
from the Bible. The pastor teaches on current events, tolerance for sin,
anything but what a believer needs to hear. Those congregations do not
confront their depravity. They may continue in whatever practices they
wish without being accountable to God. Many will be surprised, finding
flames where they expected pearly gates.
The duty of the church is not
to be “in touch” with modern man but the duty of modern man is to be in
touch with God. This pope has left a legacy.
Roger W Hancock,
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~ ><>
~~~~
|
|
I am only surmising but I doubt the Secret Service was concerned
about what the cross stood for. I am guessing the concern the
Secret Service has, is that if the crosses are made of wood or other
hard surfaces they could become convenient weapons. The Secret
Service has a job to protect the president. They do so without an
agenda. They do so with great thought as to how best to protect the
President It is with little thought of the political or other
ramifications that they make such decisions. The only ramification
they are concerned about is possible harm to our President, George W
Bush. The Secret Service agents are trained to put their lives on
the line to save the life of the President and Vice President
without any prejudice. Were it any other agency I may be just as
skeptical but I cannot in good faith blame the Secret Service
for the decision to "ban" the crosses. The intentions of the Secret
Service is, if an error is made, that the error be made on the side
of safety. Long Live the President! The Secret Service exists to
that end.
|
|
~~~~ ><>
~~~~ ~~~~
2004
~~~~
~~~~ <><
~~~~
|
Christmas Liberty, American
Tradition
December 17, 2004
Liberty’s birth, a shining star in a world of
oppression, is owed to those who, back then, celebrated the
season of the Christ Child’s birth. Over taxation caused
much discontent but not enough to rebel. Lack of
representation still was not enough to sway away the loyalty
to the King. It was however, the discontent of righteous
indignation. If not for religious rebels then the United
States would have stayed divided without religious freedom.
In the colonies, where the King’s thumb had been weak, the
colonialists had learned to appreciate their freedom to
worship. It was that love of religious liberty that brought
together brethren of various denominations to fight against
the King’s decreed religion. Where, in England, the
Catholic and Protestants disliked each other and fought, the
colonialist counterparts learned to co-operate. George
Washington made the observation that no where else and in no
other time has man lived in peace together with each
worshipping as they pleased. Love of God, that gave liberty
from sin, is the primary consensus that gave men the
fortitude to fight until free.
Today, where
the majority of Americans agree with the prior premise, we
allow the vocal minority to dictate American traditions. We
fail to call them on their lie that “separation of church
and state” is an official term. Where is our righteous
indignation now? If we stand not for our own liberty or
against oppression of others, we will see our liberty wane.
Religion is American tradition. Christianity is American
tradition. To deny the Christian influence in America’s
success does not change the fact or the proof found within
our history. Christmas is an American tradition that
acknowledges that God grants life and liberty.
© December
17, 2004 Roger W Hancock
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~ ><>
~~~~
|
Headline Deceit
December 17, 2004
THE HEADLINE: Religiosity common among
mothers who kill children
The headline is an outright
lie!
When the statistics show less
then 50% then common is not the word.
When you examine the statistics they
actually show that those who are religious have a lower incident
rate then those who do not.
Over 60% percent of Americans say
they are at least somewhat religious. Combining that with the
statistics given it can be roughly calculated that those of
religious beliefs are 50% less likely to become delusional and kill
their children.
Look deeper into all the statistics
and women are more likely to be religious than men thus lowering the
statistically likeliness of a religious person becoming so
delusional.
A more correct
conclusion: deeply held religious beliefs can be attributed to
substantially less mental health problems than those without a basis
of faith.
Actually the statistics would
show a more even likeliness except that faith brings a power from
above to overcome such problems. "Resist the devil and he shall
flee." Think on things of God and believe not the lies that are
injected when we are mentally vulnerable.
When we rely on ourselves we succumb, victory lies in trusting God.
- Roger W Hancock
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~ ><>
~~~~ |
|
A vote for Bush is a vote for righteousness. A vote for Kerry is
for unrighteousness. Their words are the proof, so I'll not go into
the issues. A vote for any other candidate is a vote for Kerry.
Even if the other third party candidates are Christian one would be
throwing their vote away from Bush. That is like taking
one's talents and handing them over to thieves. That is worse than
hiding it under a rock.
The polarization of the parties on the issues of righteousness and
unrighteousness makes it clear where the Christian Vote should go.
Some say the vote should go to the most righteous of the
candidates. Regardless of who that is George W. Bush is the most
righteous that holds the greatest possibility of winning. Vote for
Bush or your vote whether for Kerry or not will increase Kerry's
chances to win.
Vote Bush! Vote for American traditions. Vote for continued
freedom of faith in America.
~~~~ ><>
~~~~
|
Boycott Unchallenged
> Word Warriorette
sent:
> One of our list
members has a great idea for counteracting a homosexual
> economic boycott on
October 8. She suggested a "shop till you drop" day --
> and thought of a
good name: "Straight to the Malls!"
>
(WordWarriorette@yahoogroups.com)
----------------------
Let their boycott go unchallenged.
August 30, 2004
The countermeasure to the Gay/Fag economic boycott
is a cute idea.
However it may produce a self-defeating end. The best
thing to do with the
homo-econ-boycott is to simply ignore it and let it pass
as a failure
without fanfare.
Remember the Christian initiated boycott against
Disney? Not only did
it not hurt the corporation in any financial way it made
Disney bolder.
The little effect of the Disney boycott only informed
them there were little
consequences for whatever they did. That boycott was
better off if it was
never conceived.
Surveys show the percentage of our population that
is gay to be only
two percent. Of that two percent fewer will participate
making the boycott
a worthless endeavor. We can do best by not bringing
any attention to the
boycott until after, when it can be used to show the
ineffectiveness of the
gay movement.
Strategy can often be our best offense against the
perverted offense.
- Roger W Hancock,
www.PoetPatriot.com
P.S.:
Here in Seattle about ten years ago there was a
gay-activist who to save
embarrassment to his parents changed his name. His name
became Luke
Sissyfag. He became quite known on talk radio in the
Puget Sound region.
Then he branched out to international activism. Perhaps
he is active
elsewhere but I have not heard his name mentioned on the
Seattle talk radio
circuit for some time now. Out of sight, out of mind,
with little effect.
- Roger W Hancock
~~~~ ><>
~~~~
|
Abortion Endangers
August
28, 2004
A judicial
decision to allow partial birth abortion is simply irrational,
showing the ignorance of the judge.
Where in the Constitution does it say right to choose? Ok let the
women choose what to do with their bodies but not when it affects
another human being.
The procedure of Partial Birth Abortion cannot save a mother’s
life. The procedure adds undue time risking the mother’s life even
further, not to mention turning the baby breach then heinously
jabbing scissors into the back of the baby’s head to vacuum out its
brains. A C-section would remove the baby much quicker and more
likely save both lives.
A doctor who would use a partial birth abortion rather than a
C-section is being negligent, endangering both mother and murdering
(although manslaughter) the baby. Abortion to save a mother's life
is usually an excuse to eliminate an inconvenience. Any invasive
procedure has its risks, to initiate an abortion or add the
procedure serves to increase the already existing risks.
What about the rights of all human beings? When we exert one
person’s so called rights over that of another justice fails. We
have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and I
do not see where this is precluded when mother decides the baby is
not wanted. We have the right to pursue happiness; we are not
guaranteed happiness, certainly not on the backs of the innocent.
|
|
Persecution Awaits.
July 13, 2004
It has long been my belief that persecution
will eventually come to the American Church. Those Christians
actively involved in the American Political scene may be the catalyst
that will bring about persecution on them selves. We must be
bold. We must speak out. We must shine, though the light
will be shadowed by shades of unrighteousness.
The liberal policies and action, either
intentional or unintentional, have so demonized Christianity that even
moderate Republicans have come to fear Christians. The words of
our Founding Fathers should alleviate those fears but those words are
lost in our educational system. Those words of faith that
gave courage to men to risk their lives and their worldly wealth for
freedom have faded into history.
Persecution will come. "Persecution is
for the perfecting of the saints." Christians in Politics quoting the
Founding Fathers when the founders quote the bible or refer to the Lord
God Almighty, however, can hold back the persecution. If all our
politically public religious quotes are from George Washington, Benjamin
Franklin and the many others we turn the opposition towards the Founding
Fathers. It will be difficult to argue against our foundations.
The opposition will, of course, begin to twist or directly change their
offense to be against America's Christian foundations.
The fears of the apathetic will be fueled by
the lies of the secular world. The apathetic outnumber all
activists of all political factions, Christians, Conservatives,
Libertarians, Liberals, Democrats, Socialists and the many others.
The opposition against Christians, although fueled by false accusations,
unfounded mistrust, misinformation and basically lies, will gain much
momentum to allow the crowd mentality to prevail.
The apathy of the Christian community will also
facilitate the coming of persecution. When we do not exercise our
right to vote, our right to descent, we lose by default.
Times will get tough. Persecution will
prove the Church. It will separate the wheat from the tares. We
must remember to stand firm in the faith. The Church will be made
to be "without spot or wrinkle." "To live is Christ, to die is
gain." "Greater is He that is within us than he that is in the
world." Though my body be slain my Victory lies in Christ.
"Prepare ye the way of the Lord," prepare yourselves that you are made
strong in the Lord to withstand the storm that is brewing.
I pray that I be among those that will stand with Christ. I pray
that I not wither cowardly in fear of my mortal body.
- Roger W Hancock www.PoetPatriot.com
The above was in response to:
BIBLE TEACHER TELLS
BELIEVERS TO PREPARE FOR PERSECUTION
A Texas-based evangelist says Christians must be educated
and equipped to stand against the prevailing philosophical
language of the secular world. To do that, he says,
believers in America need to have the same attitude as
first-century Christians.
More details:
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/7/72004f.asp
~~~~ ><>
~~~~ |
Holy Spirit
Some confuse the Baptism of the Holy Spirit with
receiving and having the
Holy Spirit.
From the simply logic of the trinity; although
separate, the Holy Spirit is God, is Jesus. If you have Jesus you Have
God therefore you also have the Holy Spirit. Some will equate the Gifts
of the Holy Spirit, which are usually only evident after the Baptism of
the Holy Spirit, with having the Holy Spirit. I think it may only be a
matter of semantics which clouds the ability to understand another's
position on the subject. The Holy Spirit gives power to resist evil
which we are given by the enablement of being born again into Christ. A
greater power comes with the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and often the
receipt of the "Gifts". This is not to be confused with Water Baptism
although both may occur at the same time in some individuals. The
Baptism does not make one greater but gives a greater enablement to live
the "Christian" life. It puts more responsibility upon the individual
to be Christ-like giving them less excuse for not living up to the more
perfect life in Christ. The "gifts" are for the furtherance of
perfecting the saints. Some are for the perfecting of the Church while
one is for the edification of oneself in Christ. We see in part and we
understand in part. We often limit our understanding of the Scriptures
by holding dearly onto our perceived understanding, whether right or
wrong, of our current doctrines.
The bride of Christ, which by inference of "His bride
is to be made without spot and wrinkle", is currently riddled with spots
and wrinkles of sin and must be perfected. The gifts of the Holy Spirit
are to instruct, and inspire to the perfection Christ desires for His
bride, His church.
Roger W Hancock
|
|
~~~~
><> ~~~~
~~~~
2003
~~~~ ~~~~
<>< ~~~~
Cursing
dear atheists
I do not feel well
Constitution for a Moral
People
|
|
Cursing
August 18, 2003
"I think I'll believe in
Gosh instead of God. If you don't believe in Gosh too, you'll be darned
to heck." - - anonymous
This
quote displays the similarities of colloquial language to that of the
original swearing it derived from. ‘Golly jeeze’; both
‘golly’ and ‘jeeze’ derived from taking the Lords name in vain.
‘golly’ from God and ‘jeeze’ from Jesus. ‘Gee whiz’ derived from 'jeeze'. ‘Darn’
from ‘damn’; ‘darn
it’ from ‘damn it’; and ‘heck from hell’. ‘Fricken’has
become the substitute for ‘f___ ‘. Why do I Underscore when I
just said it using ‘fricken’?
I
like to think I do not swear. When
I hammer my thumb I use, ‘blast it’, the same syllables as ‘damn
it’… and more importantly the same attitude.
Shame on me. It does
show, however, I need to work on my anger.
We
rationalize away many of our sins. We
will not be able to explain them away when standing before God on judgment
day.
We
will be judged by our faith backed by our deeds or misdeeds.
You
say Christians will not be judged? Of
course they will be.
Hopefully
most will be judged as righteous. Those
with unrepented misdeeds will be judged and rewarded accordingly but
justly by our Father God. Their
access to the Father in Heaven may be limited… for all eternity.
‘Everyone
else’ does it, so what’s the big deal?
Where is the relationship with the Father of ‘everyone else’?
We are to be a peculiar people standing out, not conforming to the
sins of everyone else. We are
to be a witness of righteousness.
-
Roger W Hancock
~~~~
><> ~~~~
|
|
Oh, dear atheists,
You Say,
"BOTH ''AMERICA'S CHRISTIAN HERITAGE WEEK" AND "NATIONAL BIBLE WEEK"
INSULT
AND MARGINALIZE NONBELIEVERS."
If that is so then the conspiracy began
with our founding fathers. The
numerous statements of faith of our founding fathers show the
intenseness of
their faith and often their belief of the need of religion in government
and
society. It has been reiterated over and over again by leaders in our
country since then.
A study of nearly 15,000 writings; including newspaper
articles, pamphlets,
books and monographs; of the signers of the Declaration of Independence
showed 34% of direct quotations were from the Bible. The majority of
direct
and indirect quotations referenced by them were from the Bible.
Professors
Donald Lutz and Charles Hyneman performed the Study.
Even those who are shown to be deists were very devout often
quoting the
Christian Bible.
The Constitutions of all fifty states acknowledge God within
their text.
All but four of them include God in their preambles.
You may deny God, that is your American right, but your
attempts to
marginalize America's Christian Heritage goes without foundation.
Roger W Hancock,
www.PoetPatriot.com
~~~~
><> ~~~~
|
|
|
I do not
feel well
today...
July 8, 2003
Attending Church, as my Pastor (Dr. William Britt, of
Auburn's Bible Chapel) in Last Sunday's Sermon said, is "God's time".
He essentially said the excuses we come up with usually are pretty lame
when we consider that the time belongs to God. Church attendance allows
for the "Assembling together of the Saints" that we are not to forsake.
Selfishness is usually the underlying reason beneath the excuses we give
for not attending; yes I include myself as it is when I examine my own
actions I see the naked truth. Illness can be a viable reason for not
attending but were we really that sick? If not we should have been at
church, perhaps asking the brethren for prayer. Some, not paying
attention, will say "I do not get anything from the sermons anyway."
They are not aware of the 'Sleep-learning' that goes on. God's word is
mightier than the spoken word. It reaches the soul even when we are not
listening and will resurface later, when we need it most. Headaches,
backaches, tummy-aches, we all have them but when we do not attend
church, Sunday morning, Sunday evening and for Week day Prayer or Study
we miss the opportunity to be prayed for as well as the message God may
have directed to us. Excuses, we all have a thousand but what ex cuse
are we willing to bring before Jesus, our Lord?
-
Roger W Hancock
Commitment
by Roger W Hancock
Commit yourselves
one to another,
not to your own selfish wants
and desires.
Commit unto Him for he committed
to you,
His life, your life a good trade
to desire.
The sacrifice, the great
commitment,
what little commitment from us
to He.
He asks for life in exchange for
life,
what little we give is pleasure
to Him
To the mountains we go, missing
Church.
To justify our time away from
the fold,
we say God is there wherever we
go.
But where is the commitment to
Him, His church?
God is still there, but where’s
the church?
The church is His people to whom
we commit.
Where’s our commitment when at
the mount?
Where is the
family to whom we’re a part?
Roger W Hancock - © 5-17-2001
www.PoetPatriot.com
------Forwarded---Email---Follows---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Why go to Church?
>
> Church - What is it good for?
>
> A Church goer wrote a letter to the editor of a newspaper and
complained
> that it made no sense to go to church every Sunday.
>
> "I've gone for 30 years now," he wrote, "and in that time I have
heard
> something like 3,000 sermons. But for the life of me, I can't
remember a
> single one of them. So, I think I'm wasting my time and the
pastors are
> wasting theirs by giving sermons at all."
>
> This started a real controversy in the "Letters to the Editor"
column, much
> to the delight of the editor.
>
> It went on for weeks until someone wrote this clincher: I've been
married
> for 30 years now. In that time my wife has cooked some 32,000
meals. But for
> the life of me, I cannot recall the entire menu for a single one
of those
> meals. But I do know this: They all nourished me and gave me the
strength I
> needed to do my work. If my wife had not cooked these meals, I
would be
> physically dead today.
>
> Likewise, if I had not gone to church for nourishment, I would be
> spiritually dead today!"
>
> When you are DOWN to nothing.... God is UP to something! Faith
sees the
> invisible, believes the incredible and receives the impossible!
Thank God
> for our physical AND our spiritual nourishment!
~~~~ ><>
~~~~
|
|
Constitution for a Moral People
December 21, 2003 Just what is our
Constitution about? The meaning of the U. S. Constitution
is being changed.
The Constitution was written for a religious people. It was written for
a
moral people. The Founding Fathers intended that it protect the people
from
our government, not necessarily from each other. The Constitution
insures
our Liberty not our Freedom. Liberty is maintained by responsible
freedom.
The Constitution is being watered down,
twisted, and diverted as the river
of Political Correctness flows, corrupting our society. Had the Founders
known that sexual deviations would become an actual dialog of public
discourse, they would have addressed the situations. They would have
defined
what a marriage is had they saw a need. They would have placed in effect
a
protection for the life of the unborn, had they known the extent of our
political follies.
Our Constitution was written by a people,
for a people who took for granted,
responsibility, respect for life, respect for others, and who had a fear
of
God. Responsibility would have been spelled out had they thought we
would
become so irresponsible.
Today, lacking the moral fortitude the
Founding Fathers had, we act as
children without responsibility, without morality. The activist Judges
read
into the lines intent that was never intended; let alone thought of.
The U. S. Constitution left much up to
the common sense of a moral people.
We are a depraved people and our liberties are waning as a result.
Common
Sense has ceased.
- Roger W Hancock © 12-21-2003, www.PoetPatriot.com
|
|
~~~~ ><>
~~~~
The PoetPatriot, AKA: Fool4JESUS attends
Bible Chapel of Auburn
|
|
